Intellectual Property Law Commons^™

Some Thoughts On Warhol And The Future Of Transformative Works, Zvi S. Rosen

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

Comments On Amgen V. Sanofi, Oskar Liivak

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

Bringing Shadow Libraries Out Of Legal Shadows: An Opportunity For The Delhi High Court, Rahul Bajaj, Anchal Bhateja

Indian Journal of Law and Technology

At the heart of the copyright bargain is the need to strike a balance between fostering creativity, by incentivizing producers of intellectual property and promoting the interests of the public at large. These two are often in tension with each other. Some cases bring this tension into sharp focus. The ongoing litigation in the Delhi high Court, on the legality of shadow libraries - Libgen and Sci Hub - is one such case. The case has seminal importance for ensuring that the right to education is duly respected and fulfilled.

In this paper, we argue that this litigation offers the …

Case Law On American Indians: October 2022 - August 2023, Thomas P. Schlosser

American Indian Law Journal

No abstract provided.

“Vr”: Virtual Reality, Or Very Risky? Injuries And Liability From Virtual Reality Headsets, Andrew Stein

Seattle Journal of Technology, Environmental, & Innovation Law

No abstract provided.

The Proof Is In The Data: How Ethereum And Efficient Audits Can Reduce Litigation In The Streaming Era, Keri Ogden

Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Structure Of Secondary Copyright Liability, Felix T. Wu

Articles

Secondary copyright liability and secondary patent liability largely parallel each other. And yet, secondary copyright cases are often quite different from secondary patent cases. Whereas most secondary patent infringers act in a way that targets a particular patent or group of related patents, secondary copyright infringement mostly arises in the context of technologies or services that work across all copyrighted works. Secondary copyright liability raises issues of platform liability in ways that secondary patent liability usually does not.

The current structure and framing of secondary copyright liability inadequately account for this distinction. The result is that secondary copyright liability tends …

Rise Of The Machines: The Future Of Intellectual Property Rights In The Age Of Artificial Intelligence, Sofia Vescovo

Brooklyn Law Review

Artificial intelligence (AI) is not new to generating outputs considered suitable for intellectual property (IP) protection. However, recent technological advancements have made it possible for AI to transform from a mere tool used to assist in developing IP to the mind behind novel artistic works and inventions. One particular AI, DABUS, has done just so. Yet, while technology has advanced, IP law has not. This note sets out to provide a solution to the legal concerns raised by AI in IP law, specifically in the context of AI authorship and inventorship. The DABUS test case offers a model framework for …

A Critical Librarianship Approach For Teaching Patent Searching: Who Becomes An Inventor In America?, Dave Zwicky, Ilana Stonebraker

Libraries Faculty and Staff Scholarship and Research

The ways in which a technology is invented, owned, and approved are strongly influenced by the same oppressive and exclusionary structures that critical librarianship interrogates. Patents, limited-term grants of rights to inventions, are issued to inventors in exchange for detailed specifications of the invention. This paper examines current practices used by business librarians in teaching students how to find patents and how these practices could be critically informed given the nature of the United States patent system as it exists today. An output of this work is a suggested lesson plan with recommended resources.

That Thing Ain't Human: The Artificiality Of "Human Authorship" And The Intelligence In Expanding Copyright Authorship To Fully-Autonomous Ai, Ernest Oleksy

Cleveland State Law Review

The U.S. Copyright Review Board (the "Board") decided that works entirely created by fully-autonomous artificial intelligence ("AI") are not entitled to copyright protections. The Board based its decision on a copyrightability requirement referred to as “human authorship.” However, the Copyright Act of 1976 (the "Act") never mentions a “human” requirement to copyright authorship, nor do most of the Board’s cited authorities. Denying authorship to intellectually-impressive and economically-valuable works under a poorly-established legal subelement is antithetical to copyright law’s history and to Congress’s constitutional mandate to “promote . . . [the] useful [a]rts . . . .” It leaves creators who …

Masthead

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

No abstract provided.

New Problem, Same Old Ecpa: Facebook, Inc. V. State Of New Jersey And The Electronic Communications Privacy Act’S Growing Inadequacy, Austin Fauni

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

No abstract provided.

One Step Forward Or Two Steps Back For The Music Industry: Analyzing The Statutory And Practical Issues In Title I Of The Music Modernization Act, Gabriel Ross

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

No abstract provided.

Adopting A Solution To Copyright’S Orphan Works Problem, Kylie Arman

UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal

No abstract provided.

Lighting The Fuses: The Third Circuit Loads A Volley Against Interface Copyright Ability In Pyrotechnics V. Xfx, Ryan Graham

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Trademarks In An Algorithmic World, Christine Haight Farley

Washington Law Review

According to the sole normative foundation for trademark protection—“search costs” theory—trademarks transmit useful information to consumers, enabling an efficient marketplace. The marketplace, however, is in the midst of a fundamental change. Increasingly, retail is virtual, marketing is data-driven, and purchasing decisions are automated by AI. Predictive analytics are changing how consumers shop. Search costs theory no longer accurately describes the function of trademarks in this marketplace. Consumers now have numerous digital alternatives to trademarks that more efficiently provide them with increasingly accurate product information. Just as store shelves are disappearing from consumers’ retail experience, so are trademarks disappearing from their …

The Gptjudge: Justice In A Generative Ai World, Maura R. Grossman, Paul W. Grimm, Daniel G. Brown, Molly (Yiming) Xu

Duke Law & Technology Review

Generative AI (“GenAI”) systems such as ChatGPT recently have developed to the point where they can produce computer-generated text and images that are difficult to differentiate from human-generated text and images. Similarly, evidentiary materials such as documents, videos, and audio recordings that are AI-generated are becoming increasingly difficult to differentiate from those that are not AI-generated. These technological advancements present significant challenges to parties, their counsel, and the courts in determining whether evidence is authentic or fake. Moreover, the explosive proliferation and use of GenAI applications raises concerns about whether litigation costs will dramatically increase as parties are forced to …

United States Social Security Administration Response To The Office Of Science And Technology Policy Memo, 2022: Public Access Plan (December 2023)

Copyright, Fair Use, Scholarly Communication, etc.

SSA response to OSTP memo, 2022: Public Access Plan (December 2023)

Tech Supremacy: The New Arms Race Between China And The United States, Xuan-Thao Nguyen

Articles

In the brewing tech war between the United States and China, the quest for tech supremacy is in full force. Through enacting a series of laws and policies, China aims to reach its goal of tech supremacy. If China succeeds, U.S. corporations will face a daunting task in competing against Chinese products and services in core industries and in sectors where artificial intelligence and technological breakthroughs reign. This Article is the first to identify and analyze China’s 2022 Law on Science and Technology Progress, Personal Information Protection Law, Made in China 2025, National Intellectual Property Strategies, and digital currency e-CNY; …

In Satan We Trust: The Satanic Temple’S Ongoing Crusade To Protect Abortion Rights, Bradley Koberg

Cardozo Law Review

In the summer of 2022, the Supreme Court overruled the nearly fifty-year-old precedent of Roe v. Wade, eliminating the constitutional right to an abortion. This was one of several decisions in which the newly minted conservative supermajority undermined what could be seen as progressive precedents. At the same time, the Court has been elevating religious liberty claims and strengthening legal protections for religious individuals and organizations (predominantly Christian). For anybody who cares about the “so-called separation of . . . church and state,” this conservative Christian reformation taking place in the nation’s highest court is a cause for concern.

However, …